| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 02/07/2013 8:58:03 AM PST by Religion Moderator, reason:
Childish behavior |
Posted on 01/16/2013 8:57:49 AM PST by marshmallow
General audience, Benedict XVI defines the Incarnation as "something unimaginable, the face of God can be seen, the process that began with Abraham is fulfilled." The Week of Prayer for Christian Unity, he asks "for the great gift" to "proclaim together that Jesus is the Savior of the world."
Vatican City (AsiaNews) - "The desire to know the face of God is in every man, even the atheists," but this desire is only realized by following Christ, in whom, in the Incarnation, "something unimaginable took place, the journey that began with Abraham is fulfilled. He is the Son, the fullness of all Revelation; the mediator who shows us the face of God. "
And "to proclaim together that Jesus is the Saviour of the world" Benedict XVI asked for incessant prayers for "the great gift" of Christian unity in the forthcoming week, which begins on the 18th of this month.
Previously, in his catechesis, he again reflected on the meaning of Christmas, in a commentary on John's Gospel in which the apostle Philip asks Jesus to show them the Father. The answer of Jesus, "introduces us to the heart of the Church's Christological faith; For the Lord says: "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father" (Jn 14:9).This expression summarizes the novelty of the New Testament, the novelty that appeared in the cave of Bethlehem: God can be seen, he showed his face is visible in Jesus Christ".
The theme of "seeking the face of God" is present throughout the Old Testament, so much so that the Hebrew term "face", occurs no less than 400 times, 100 of which refer to God." The of Jewish religion which the religion forbids all images, "for God can not be depicted," and "can not be reduced to an object," tells us that "God...
(Excerpt) Read more at asianews.it ...
Deu 31:27 For I know how rebellious and stubborn you are. Behold, even today while I am yet alive with you, you have been rebellious against the LORD. How much more after my death!
Deu 31:28 Assemble to me all the elders of your tribes and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears and call heaven and earth to witness against them.
Deu 31:29 For I know that after my death you will surely act corruptly and turn aside from the way that I have commanded you. And in the days to come evil will befall you, because you will do what is evil in the sight of the LORD, provoking him to anger through the work of your hands."
Deuteronomy 31 is the reality (e.g you're rebellious, stubborn and evi).
Oddly enough our churches use to preach both messages. Now most of our churches seem only to want to preach Deut 30. (The good churches still preach both.)
“I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.” (Deuteronomy 30:19)
“And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.” (Joshua 24:15)
“Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.” (James 4:17) [seems there’s an option there doesn’t it?]
Then there is Jesus parable.
Matthew 22:2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son, 3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come. 4 Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage. 5 But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise: 6 And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them. 7 But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. 8 Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. 9 Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. 10 So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests. 11 And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment: 12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless. 13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 14 For many are called, but few are chosen.
Why weren’t some chosen? It was because they refused or refused to act in accordance. Would Calvinists claim that all who God calls are chosen per this parable or are there some who are called but don’t get in?
God gives choices right up until the end.
Revelation 9: 20 And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk: 21 Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.
Revelation 22: 17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
If man had no choice those passages would never make sense.
It’s in their confessions. If they disagree with their confessions that’s one thing but if they agree with their confessions by definition they believe in double predestination. Fudge words aside.
No, there are different confessions. If any particular confession is double predestinarian, then so be it.
Personally, I don’t see how, in terms of its relevance for the human beings involved, that it is significant. If you’re not one of those picked to be the saved, then you’re one of the damned, whether specifically picked to be so or not. If you are picked to be one of the damned, then you’re still one of the damned.
Either way, damned if you do and damned if you don’t. :>)
Wrong on two levels. We are not responsible for our salvation and the blood of Christ is totally sufficient for our salvation. We are however responsible if we reject God’s call as seen in my previous posts of scripture to you. We can not take responsibility for our salvation because without the grace of God opening our hearts to Him we would never have the opportunity.
Oh, I understand completely. That’s the fudge factor. What you may not be taking into account is the original sin of Adam. Calvinists say that was also predestined. So using the term “passing by” someone now doesn’t absolve them of anything. They still confess that the entire “chain of events” was predestined. If God predestined Adam to sin and all have that sin nature because of it there is no getting around that it’s double predestination.
As was stated on this thread earlier. Calvinists believe we have no choice. “we are just along for the ride”.
I don’t at least as it’s being used to discredit the scriptural truth of choice. None of us here, that I have seen, define the use of free will in the context of scripture as it is defined in the dictionary.
According to the Calvinists you have no choice.
>> The scorpion, in his last few breaths, says, "I couldn't help it. It's my nature." <<
Nice little story but Calvinists also believe that God predestined Adam to sin so God also predestined our sin nature. Interesting how one gets caught in his own web isn’t it.
How could they? Calvinists say man is predestined. God predestined Adam from which all men inherited a sin nature then God predestined only those He chooses to save. So by inference God predestined all to whatever outcome they are destined for. As was posted earlier on this thread. Calvinists believe “we are just along for the ride”. Not much sense in any more discussion on the matter.
I’ve been clear enough on it as well and so consider the question answered.
So do Pelagians and Arminians. They just believe in the kind of predestination where God really had no control and where he left his predestination decisions up to his creation before he locked it in place with his foreknowledge.
I prefer to believe in a God who knew exactly what he was doing. One who not only knew the future, but DECLARED it.
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: Isaiah 46:10
I’m not sure we have the same understanding. I believe double predestination to be that God predetermines both the saved and the damned. He picks the saved, and He picks the lost.
The Westminster Confession says that God does no violence to the will. In other words, everyone has free will, the way I read it.
It’s just that a depraved will will always choose depraved things.
FWIW your understanding of Calvinism appears to be at best superficial and at worst an example of kicking against the pricks.
I have used every one of the arguments that you have used on this thread to defend my firm belief in what is called Arminianism and my firm belief that somehow the Calvinist positions regarding unconditional grace were somehow “unfair” or “unjust” and that somehow it was the duty of God to treat all his creatures equally and fairly and that any decision of God that did not include a free will decision of men must on its face be evil or worse.
I had a slow change of heart and now I find myself much closer to the Calvinist theology than the Arminian construct. I have come to the realization that the Calvinist position is much more consistent with the entire bible and with all individual scriptures than the Arminian construct. When you study the entire bible with an eye towards what God has done with his creation you pretty much have to conclude that God has done with his creation pretty much everything he intended to do. Not even pretty much. God has done ALL that he intended.
I had my change of position when I decided to go on the Catholic threads and get into discussions of theology. I developed a clearer sense of my position when I argued with Catholics. Eventually I found myself taking the positions of the Calvinists which I had spent nearly a decade trying desperately to dispute.
I have read and studied numerous anti-Calvinist books by guys like Dave Hunt and others. I know every single argument against Calvinism and then some. But I tended to avoid positive works about Calvinism like Spurgeon’s Sermons on Calvinism, and Calvin’s own Institutes of Religion and his commentaries.
At some point I began reading Calvin’s works and listening to Sermons by Spurgeon and John MacArthur and Lorraine Boettner. The more I studied these men’s work the more I began to understand the doctrine which they were preaching. As I began to understand it more, my repulsion at the doctrine as I misunderstood it became softened and eventually I found that I was actually embracing many of the teachings of Calvin and Spurgeon and others.
Why don’t you try this experiment. Argue with an Arminian. Challenge an Arminian. Try learning enough about both sides that you are capable of debating both Calvinists and Arminians. Once you get to that point, I believe you will have a clearer understanding of both positions and your hatred of the idea of Calvinism will soften.
Blah...blah...blah... Where HAVE I heard this???
You've both have been given opportunities (several times now) to post your own definitions on "free will" from a reliable source. Since you have not, then it's clear you have none. So it's disingenuous to pretend this is the wrong definition or that it's bogus. Even if you are trying to use your "free will" to make it disappear. BUT, if you are ever interested in posting one I'd be interested in reading it.
Your votes don't count by rules of the committee (me).
WORD OF FRIENDLY ADVICE: To be perfectly honest it looks rather stupid to argue with the dictionary or to say the dictionary is a heretical source. But then, hey, that's me.
After studying this issue for over two years, I decided to read the scriptures from cover to cover with the Reformed view in mind to see if these things were so. After that, the rest is history.
But one only needs to read the gospel of John to see how clear it becomes.
God predestined our sin nature is what you wrote.
Yet, the Calvinists believe He did so as not to do violence to the will. In other words, you can make a horse so that he will drink water, but you don’t make him drink if no violence has been done to his will.
I was born with a sin nature. If you are responsible - why do you sin?
We are not responsible for our salvation.
I am so I accepted what Jesus offered... His death in place of mine - He took my penalty. Don't you 'hear and obey' either which is the will of God?
If we were responsible for our salvation, then the blood of Christ is only partially sufficient.
How could you even type those words - that the blood of Jesus is partially 'anything'? Who would even say/ teach/imply such? If someone needs those words to defend their agenda - they are already off the scale of Christianity. When I received and accepted Jesus as my Savior, how does it make the blood of Christ (is) only partially sufficient?
If we are responsible for our salvation, then we become our own Saviors.
If you don't personally RECEIVE the GIFT of salvation by accepting Jesus as your Savior, you will become your own savior and die in your own sins.
God GAVE His Son so we must RECEIVE Him in order to have Him as Savior.
"He came to that which was His own, but His own did not RECEIVE Him." John 1:11
"Yet to all who RECEIVED Him, to those who believed in His Name, He GAVE the right to become children of God" --John 1:12
Salvation is a GIFT..."For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast."
I read here how some are boasting - some about 'their' works and others who think they don't have to RECEIVE the GIFT for they were already picked/chosen.
We become co-redemptors in our eternal destiny.
Those 'in Christ' become 'co-heirs' with JESUS because they RECEIVED Him. Only God redeems so, again, 'co-redemptors' is off the scale of Christianity so it is for your agenda purposes only. Hint: Don't 'use it' on born again Christians for they know better - it's a red flag that propaganda is in it's midst.
Romans 8:17 "And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with Him, that we may be also glorified together."
Galatians 3:29 "If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise".
Galatians 4:7 "So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, God has made you also an heir."
So that means they were a slave once and those who CHOSE not to be a slave (to sin) any longer by CHOOSING Jesus 'LIFE' they are a son/co-heir. NO ONE can have what they don't CHOOSE to RECEIVE first. Heaven is a witness....there is life/death, blessings/curses, good/evil. Jesus says 'choose'. And because HE loves ALL, HE gives the answer to choose LIFE.
God didn't pick, God GAVE - to ALL and NOT ALL RECEIVED Him. Are you one of those?
Ephesians 3:6 "This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus."
Did you do that because you were wise or because God changed your heart?
God GAVE His Son so we must RECEIVE Him in order to have Him as Savior.
If your nature is to reject God and reject Christ, then how can you receive him unless God gives you a receptive heart? Did you receive him because you were wise or was it because you had been changed so that you were receptive to the gospel and receptive to Christ?
Which comes first, the changing of the nature or the acceptance of Christ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.